The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. ... vs S/S Verma Tractors on 25 May, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. ... vs S/S Verma Tractors on 25 May, 2026

Bench: Piyush Agrawal





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:120105
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 295 of 2019   
 
   The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow    
 
  .....Revisionist(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   S/S Verma Tractors    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Revisionist(s)   
 
:   
 
Bipin Kumar Pandey   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
 
 
   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 7
 
   
 
 HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.

Heard learned ACSC for the revisionist. Nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party even in the revised call.

The instant revision has been filed against the impugned order dated 28.03.2019 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 41/2016 for the Assessment Year 2003-04 arising out the proceedings under the UP VAT Act.

Following questions of law are involved in the revision:-

"I. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Commercial Tax Tribunal was legally justified in declaring the dealer exempted from sales on teh sale of three wheeler on the ground that Vikram tempo had been sold in which the tax was already paid on the chassis and the body mounted on it separately?

II. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal was legally justified to exempt the dealer from tax liability despite the judgement given by the division bench of this Hon'ble Court in the case of dealer itself report in 2007 NTN (34) - 201?"

Learned ACSC submits that the Tribunal has wrongly allowed the appeal exempting the dealer from tax on the sale of three wheeler on the ground that Vikram Tempo had been sold in which the tax was already paid on the chassis and the body mounted on it separately. He further submits that the issue in hand is squarely covered against the dealer in the inter-parties judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Verma Tractors Vs. State of U.P. & Others [2007 NTN (34) 201].

After hearing learned ACSC, the Court has perused the records.

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the issued in hand is squarely covered by the inter-parties judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in favour of the Revenue in M/s Verma Tractors (supra), in which in paragraph no. 23, the Division Bench of this Court has held as under:-

"23. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, we have no manner of doubt that the three wheelers sold by the petitioner after getting the body mounted on the chassis purchased after paying the taxes, do constitute a process of manufacture and a separate commercial commodity comes into existence. In common parlance also the auto rickshaw is treated differently than its chassis or its body. Therefore, merely because entry 18 of the notification dated 9.5.1993, which mentions ''motor vehicle' including chassis would not make the motor vehicle and the chassis which are two commercially different commodities, one so as to make the dealer effecting sale of three wheelers where tax had been paid on the chassis and body, not liable to tax under the Act. In a nut shell, the imposition of tax on the sale of three wheelers, in the present case, is wholly in accordance with law."

In view of the aforesaid facts & circumstances of the case, the instant revision is allowed in terms of the judgement in M/s Verma Tractors (supra).

The question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

(Piyush Agrawal,J.) May 25, 2026 Amit Mishra

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court